Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Selena on Diversity

In her screed against the lacrosse team in Sunday’s New York Times, Selena Roberts positioned herself as an aggressive champion of diversity, while also appealing to class-based sentiments by taking a negative tone to former lacrosse players' Wall Street jobs.

Such a figure, no doubt, practices what she preaches, and demonstrates a deep commitment to diversity in her personal life, correct?

Not quite.

According to her Times bio, Roberts is a resident of Westport, Connecticut, a suburb in Fairfield County. The US Census Bureau's fact page reveals that Westport is a bastion of neither racial nor economic diversity. Of its 25,598 residents, 24,560, or 95.5 percent, are white. Westport has a grand total of 292 African-American residents. Barely 1 percent of Roberts' fellow townsfolk, in other words, are black.

What about economic diversity? The median family income in Westport is $153,131, more than $100,000 greater than the median family income for the United States as a whole. And a grand total of 104 families live below the poverty level. Barely 1 percent of Roberts' fellow townsfolk, in other words, are poor. The town website has forms for people who need to store their boats--either on water or on land--and for residents-only tennis and golf facilities.

Roberts, as an affluent columnist, has the right to live wherever she can afford. Yet, judged by the severity with which she condemns others for exhibiting insufficient sensitivity to minorities or the poor, it comes as something of a surprise to see that she has chosen to live in a lily white, upper-class suburb.

51 comments:

I think that Selena Roberts should make her chosen home town her next target. What a hypocrite! She should be working on diversifying the membership of the country clubs of Westport, CT, instead of picking on the South.

What next-- news that a Marxist idealogue from Duke's Despicable 88 is an avid golfer?!

I believe the old term for these lazy and soft hypocrites who loved nothing more than prescribing fiery change for other members of society, excepting their own particular elite of course, was Boulevard Socialist. sic semper tyrannis

C'mon, KC, you aren't surprised that Selena is a limousine liberal, are you?? Name me one prominent, well-paid media type who doesn't live with the elites. It's stereotypical of liberal Democrats and country club Republicans. The difference being that the Reps don't run their mouths about how bad the "po' folks" have it. Welcome to the real world.....

Reading about where Roberts lives, all I can say is: What a parody she is of her type: condemn others while you live in comfort. The NY Times must be full of those types. I guess that makes it easier to only deal with each other, thus pretend what you want to be true actually is true. Roberts likes to pretend we're still back in late March '06.

Insulting someone because of where they live is not a valid intellectual argument. She is not responsible for the diversity of her town any more than anyone else who decides to live in a town with good schools, nice houses, and low crime.

Besides that, what does where you live have to do with your opinions on diversity? Is it somehow required to live in a poor town in order for your opinions to have merit?

Frankly, Professor, this is a poorly thought-through ad hominem in the vein of those you oppose (hasn't this exact same thing been said about the hoax victims?) and I'd expect better from you.

Par for the course for a limousine liberal. Maybe in light of liberal's approval of "carbon credits" - the 1st such ploy was "diversity credits" where wealthy judges and members of the ruling elites proclaimed a "love for diversity" and then traded diversity credits by claiming but for them, the children of working class city residents and ghetto residents would have missed out on the "excitement and opportunities" of being force-bused to one anothers neighborhoods. All while the kids in private school could claim that "My mommy and daddy launched the lawsuits that are integrating the other kids! They really do a lot of good deeds!"

OT - From a Liestoppers post I just did - now that "Until Proven Innocent" is up on Amazon and ABC has talked about it how about some crumbs here, KC? After all you have written, I know wads of stuff will not make it into a book. But would make fine CD fodder. Comments?Also congrats on your appointment to the Fulbright chair at U of Tel Aviv for a year.

My Liestopper comments:

Yeah! Good news! I can't wait to buy a few copies (Amazon discount @ 16+ bucks!)

I'd love KC to also consider doing a CD of his weblog on this matter. Maybe edit out the "I don't know about this but I's gonna look" type posts and a few (rare) mistakes or misattributions.

Part of the best stuff KC had was "The Wendy Murphy File", "Statements of Karla Holloway", "The Worst of Cash Michaels", "Nancy Grace". The Timeline and actions of the whole Group of 88.

It would be sweet to have such a CD as fans, even sweeter if they get handed out to media producers and "influencers" as part of the book tour. Imagine Wendy Murphy a few years out on her (hopefully rarer TV and public speaking gigs) having to field a question "In light of the present issue, I'd like you to comment on something you said from KC Johnsons "The Wendy Murphy File" on the Duke case..(listen for hissing and rattling noises from her)

And seriously, these continuing miscarriages of justice really should be known about and discussed in law schools. All too often, the schools teach here were long ago abuses, but that most of it was fixed by activist courts and the 1964 Civil Rights Act. We know differently. It moved to different venues where states have wildly disproportionate punishments, rights are compromised by slow adaption of technology readily available in other industries, costs too high for many to afford justice, and the miscarriages moving out of minority racial discrimination to discrimination arising from ideology - Salem-like child abuse show trials, ideological show trials. It's time those law schools teach past Gideon, and the Scottsboro Boys, and teach from Dorothy Rabinowitz's investigations and from Taylor and Johnson's book of the present day miscarriages of justice.

5:32 Mp, she is not responsible for the diversity of her town - She is responsible for moving into the town, Like, if she is working in NY, why is she not living in Bed-Sty and saving the world? Yes, I lived at Dupont Circle in the District for 30 years,

However, there is one Duke player from Norwalk High School in Norwalk, CT. Norwalk is a small city just to the south of Westport which is 15% black. The median family income in Norwalk is roughly half that of Westport.

Selena "reported" on the Duke Lax issue from the persepective of the young men being white and from financial privilege and making that the central issue wrongly rather than reporting the facts. We have every right to look athow her personal perseceptions color her reporting.

That's not, however, what I got from this post. As I read it, it suggested that people who live in upper-class towns can't have equally valid opinions, a sentiment that has been trotted out by the Group of 88 on multiple occasions. Perhaps the error here is in my reading.

After reading her column yesterday I phoned in my NYT subscription cancellation.

The NYT was present in our family for generations. I would have preferred to call with congratulations for reporting well done. But their continued misrepresentations and lazy reporting of the Durham case made the call much easier.

It is amazing that they are so off the mark on this story of judicial crisis.

And to Selena, kids don't choose to be born rich or born poor. You can't hold that against them. Some rich kids do great things, some poor kids do great things, and some kids do bad things regardless of being born rich or poor. Trying to belittle people because you perceive them as rich or poor is just lazy.

What is disappointing is when people who are seen as fortunate and to have many resources, go way wrong and lie. Such as DA Nifong and the shocking number of others who participated in perpetuating the hoax and using the AV while waving or banging the flag of justice.

Perhaps it's my continued naivete, but it seems to me that the Times should hold itself to a higher standard than the Herald-Sun. This is someone whose March 2006 column ranked as among the most vile in the case. Rather than apologize or at least tone down her rhetoric, she continues to plow ahead.

Apparently the NYT might have some other false rape issues. On the cover of the March 18th issue of 'The New York Times' there were pictures of female American soldiers who, the writer claimed, were raped in Iraq. On March 25, there was a correction published that conceded that one of the soldiers pictured on the cover had never been to Iraq.The paper of record? No. The paper of wishful thinking and idealogical opportunism.

Nifong is still in office. The players are still facing 30 years in prison. The incompetent/criminal police and judges are still working every day. And yet you think the story is losing its legs. Take your ennui elsewhere - no one is compelling you to read this blog.

I believe what 5:32 is saying, when saying "She (Senena) is not responsible for the diversity of her town any more than anyone else who decides to live in a town with good schools, nice houses, and low crime. " is that if you want good schools, nice houses, and low crime then you can't have diversity. Perhaps the opinion of a closet racist? No, that would be calling names.

What I'm saying there is that normal people, at least, don't chose the town they're living in based on its compatibility with their opinions on diversity. I know I didn't; did you?

I live in a 'lily white, upper-class suburb' and I don't understand why that should make my opinions any less valid. Unless I critisized someone else for living in a similar situation, which I guess is what KC is trying to say here...?

The reason people like Ms. Selena don't live in the hood is because they've learned it isn't wise. They aren't wanted.

I'm reminded of a Professor I had at U.T. Austin in the '70's. A real Group of 88 mush brain.

The professor could not understand why, when he moved to the hood and his childs bike was stolen, the father of the perp. (a young minority) beat the she-i-t out of the professor for demanding his property back.

the only people who are safe with such feelings for diversity are these people.

we see what a healthy dose of diversity did for the lax players and the young woman who attended the black frat party. as long as selena stays in that suburb then she can have all the warm feelings about diversity that she wants.

i would caution her, however, to restrain those feelings if she ever visits the real world. these feelings just might be dangerous.

Where is this entire argument headed? What is the purpose a one-sided debate?

Please put aside your tunnel vision and look at the big picture.

My dad was a huge bigot and racist, and he had that RIGHT. What he failed to do was allow his "children" to consider other ideologies. That's exactly what goes on in here.

Does any shred of tolerance exist on either side (left or right)?

Take, for instance, the man who built a skyscraper on the concept of a "pencil". At that time, he had not the slightest empathy for minorities. Today, his foundation (heirs) supports MANY liberal causes (some of these causes I loathe).

It's a time for healing. It's a time for compromising. It's a time we ALL unite. Forget Duke ... We have a "country" to save.

It is perfectly acceptable to question where someone lives when it is so far out of a racial balance that might be found in other parts of the country.

But it is even more important to question where Roberts lives because she raised the question about diversity. Her arguments, or rants rather, about diversity lose all credibility when you learn that she favors low crime, good schools, nice houses and the like over diversity.

She raised the issue. Prof. Johnson did not. So, an examination of her own commitment to diversity is perfectly in order. Apparently, she values diversity no more than I do. And on that, I can agree with Roberts. Racial diversity is more dangerous than valuable. I'll honestly state my opinion. Will she?

Uh, Selena, want diversity? Try the Marine Corps. My middle son, with SAT and ACT scores that drew letters from schools like Yale and the University of Chicago, chose to be a Marine. No "classism", no "racism", no "elitism" there. Oh, by the way, he met his rifle instructor down at Parris Island, and "she" seemed nice. Crawl down from your Ivy Tower, Selena, and meet the best and the brightest [and most diverse!].

My Mother said " We can't save the world, the country or even our town. What we can do is make our little corner of the world as good, ethical, honest and clean as we can." Saving America one good deed at a time,

New English for Selena? Nah. Just the old Grain of Sand that Creates the Pearl …Conflict Creation Routine.

I re-read the ‘English’ used by Selena, Amanda, the G88 and compared what they had to say with the words of Linda Fairstein, the former head of the Manhattan District Attorney’s Sex Crimes Unit.

All but Fairstein are using shock English as …conflict model building blocks…to raise consciousness.

During the Civil Rights training in the 1960’s frequent reference was made to the work of William James, American psychologist and philosopher (1842-1920), who is credited with the consciousness moment in Education.

Emotions, we were taught, cause one to be more conscious or to say it like might be said in the classroom. “The grain of sand is the necessary irritant that prompts the oyster to create the pearl”.

The little piece of wisdom is credited to William James.

Selena, Amanda and the G88 are functioning as that necessary and irritating ‘grain of sand’ as they seek to create the pearls of wisdom that will change the world as we know it.

Think … Potbangers.

Fairstein is having none of it. She speaks in clear English. Noun – Verb – Object

When so many of these ‘Grain of Sand’ folks are working together, a critical mass develops whereby the organizational environment becomes hostile. Thus, the hostile work environment law suits.

The English that we are reading from these people is really nothing more than Developmental Conflict Model Building.

Apparently all of these people believe that Americans are just a naïve as they might have been when William James was alive.

Perhaps we will be allowed to see hostile work environment argued in a proper court of law.

Apparently Robert's alma mater is not that diverse either. Auburn University has a black student population of 8%.

What is a "champion of diversity" anyway?Isn't diversity supposed to be about recognizing and appreciating differences and individual uniqueness blah blah blah...What, just not when it comes to rich white successful male athletes?(or anything white for that matter).

Diversity is the liberal's cat o'nine tails with which they flog themselves daily!

A little digging sheds some light on Selena Roberts. As a newspaper agendist might write (following in the footsteps of so many before her…):

"Selena Roberts, discredited agendist for the NY Times, live in Westport, Connecticut, an exclusive community with an easy commute to New York City. Roberts lives on a tree-lined, dead-end street that has but a single gated access point. The beautiful homes in her neighborhood are graced with fine-trimmed lawns, many decorated by landscaping firms employing undocumented aliens.

Roberts home is valued by a popular real estate valuation service at $963,995 – far beyond the means of the average American, but within reach of an agendist working for a fading, major New York daily. Roberts home is surrounded by other homes that are valued from a low of $772,000 to a high of $1.4 million.

Roberts was unavailable for comment as to how she was able to afford her home in a community where so many of the residents send their children to private schools."

Georgia GirlThe internet provides a great medium through which to exercise our freedom of speech, that's the first step to saving our country.Also, this is a forum to discuss the Duke Lacrosse case, and isn't meant to be a place where one can discuss their ideas on saving the world.

Hey, I like the idea of "diversity credits". See, I live and work tech in Silly-con valley and most of the people I live and work with are "privileged white males" (here, under "white" I'm of course including about 65% of them being Chinese or Indian, but who's counting? And the Jews too -- don't get me started -- you practically have to speak Hebrew here and I'd be upset except I'm one of them and we have the protocols of the elders and all to keep us busy).

Anyhow, the point is, we all end up in our isolated social circles and the one place I did actually get useful diversity was at a co-op preschool where you had to put in work weekends and so I would be rebuilding the roof of a playhouse working with a Mexican gardener, a black libertarian, and a VP at Cisco all together nailing tar tiles on a roof. You can actually make friends outside of your circle under such conditions.

I'm guessing it would be the same volunteering to do work at habitat for humanity etc and I'd count such activities as real diversity credits to offset any country club a privileged pontificator wants to pontificate from.

Can't speak to KC, but what the heck is a conservative today? The group of 88 are disgusting ... but then so are most of Bush's appointments AND for exactly the same reason: Ideology and loyalty rather than rationalism and merit.

For one bleeding example: Doesn't this whole Durham railroad justice case case make you wonder just a tiny little bit about how many of those guys locked up in Guantanamo are actually guilty of anything? They haven't been in the normal legal system, have been denied representation and some can document their innocence as well as any of the LAX 3 can ... but they have NO out. Hopefully this isn't what you mean by conservative.

I mean, I think I may actually be a conservative and I wouldn't go near today's republican party. Not that I'd go for the democrats either. Rather, one must pick and choose very carefully these days, choose the rational people over the ideological nutters. The labels simply don't work today. Just try to fit "limited government" on Karl Rove's hat as another example.

Blog Awards

About Me

I am from Higgins Beach, in Scarborough, Maine, six miles south of Portland. After spending five years as track announcer at Scarborough Downs, I left to study fulltime in graduate school, where my advisor was Akira Iriye. I have a B.A. and Ph.D. from Harvard, and an M.A. from the University of Chicago. At Brooklyn College and the CUNY Graduate Center, I teach classes in 20th century US political, constitutional, and diplomatic history; in 2007-8, I was Fulbright Distinguished Chair for the Humanities at Tel Aviv University.

Book

Comments Policy

(1) Comments are moderated, but with the lightest of touches, to exclude only off-topic comments or obviously racist or similar remarks.

(2) My clearing a comment implies neither that I agree nor that I disagree with the comment. My opinion is expressed in my words and my words only. Since this blog has more than 1500 posts, and since I at least occasionally comment myself, the blog provides more than enough material for readers to discern my opinions.

(3) If a reader finds an offensive comment, I urge the reader to e-mail me; if the comment is offensive, I will gladly delete it.

(4) Commenters who either misrepresent their identity or who engage in obvious troll behavior will not have their comments cleared. Troll-like behavior includes, but is not limited to: repeatedly linking to off-topic sites; repeatedly asking questions that already have been answered; offering unsubstantiated remarks whose sole purpose appears to be inflaming other commenters.

"From the Scottsboro Boys to Clarence Gideon, some of the most memorable legal narratives have been tales of the wrongly accused. Now “Until Proven Innocent,” a new book about the false allegations of rape against three Duke lacrosse players, can join these galvanizing cautionary tales . . , Taylor and Johnson have made a gripping contribution to the literature of the wrongly accused. They remind us of the importance of constitutional checks on prosecutorial abuse. And they emphasize the lesson that Duke callously advised its own students to ignore: if you’re unjustly suspected of any crime, immediately call the best lawyer you can afford."--Jeffrey Rosen, New York Times Book Review